Why is Ubuntu the most popular linux distro among professional developers using linux (and it seems like its vanilla...

Why is Ubuntu the most popular linux distro among professional developers using linux (and it seems like its vanilla unity ubuntu)?
Does have it more support for certain software that others don't?
Why is there a lot of hate on it here?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=NfjeZJUvQI0
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>Does have it more support for certain software that others don't?

Generally this. Ubuntu, Linux, and Debian are the three largest distros (I'm fairly certain at least). If a developer extends support to Linux, it is typically for these distros and, in my experience, seem to work the best for.

>linux is a distro
>ubuntu is it's own distro
you have no idea what you're talking about, you dumb shit kid

>Ubuntu, Linux, and Debian are the three largest distros
Stop pretending to know what you don't.

Ubuntu isn't real Linux.

he probably meant linux mint

That's even worse.
The only real distro he mentioned is debian as ubuntu and mint simply add their own packages on top of debian.

>Linux is a separate distro, and it is one of the three largest.

I can only speak for myself, in that I'd rather spend time as a """professional""" making money than tinkering with a Linux install. Ubuntu covers my needs with minimal work. Pretty sad that I care so much about making use of my time despite sitting here on Sup Forums to tell all of you.

>That's even worse.
nah

because it has enough in common with debian to be usable to write code on and you can set it up with minimal fuss -it's vanilla because developers spend their time writing code, not ricing their DE

It "just werks", so you can spend more time getting shit done than getting shit working.

is there a way to get rid of the amazon crap and use a different de?

Of course. Open up a terminal and sudo apt-get install or purge as needed. It's all just Linux famalam.

You can disable it in settings, yes
You can switch to amy other DE, yes

>Ubuntu = Debian
Stop posting

ubuntu is debian
debian is not ubuntu

Ubuntu isn't Danish. It's a derivative of Debian. Not the same thing.

>tfw autocorrected

People hate it because it's what the majority of linux users use instead of riced out retarded Arch installs

dumb phoneposter

Arch is a good distro, fuck off normie, REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

If you have plenty of time on your hands.

BECAUSE

CANONICAL

GAVE THE FUCK UP

youtube.com/watch?v=NfjeZJUvQI0

Arch user here. Come at me

because amazon and canonical
>Ubuntu, Linux, and Debian are the three largest distros (I'm fairly certain at least)
>Ubuntu, Linux, and Debian
>Linux

He might mean his LFS project

what are the main functional differences between debian and ubuntu?

PPA
Package versions
Cinnamon

Ubuntu is the best for developers and web developers. It never breaks and you can apt-get everything you need easily.

Or they could use Debian and get the same thing without the spyware.

Ubuntu has gui based software installation. People who are used to windows or osx are not gonna flock to the cli to install shit, they want one click solutions.

Debian is irrelevant unless you want cinnamon

Or unless you don't want all of your searches sent to daddy Bezos.

>developers and web developers
no.
all you need are the developer packages and tools you use to develop. heck i know a guy who develops on fucking slackware just because hes so used to it and doesnt like new things

Well, Ubuntu derivatives never had this feature.

Ubuntu is shit. I hate it.

Manjaro Linux is much better.

CRUX = DEBIAN
>Cux

ARCH = UBUNTU

MANJARO = MINT

Nigga please, it crashed each time I booted it, after a while I just swapped to arch and it hasn't been broken yet

it just werks.

sorta sure, you're always bound to find at least a how to install blurb for ubuntu. not to say you can't install shit in other distros of course.

and the hate is because of the misguided amazon integration canonical defaulted to on in the unity desktop. there is also the coziness they have with microsoft (see bash on ubuntu on windows) which i think would have happened with or without canonical regardless.

also there is a dose of distro elitism, which is pure cancer.

Ubuntu is the kind of distribution that pisses me off. By default it is bloated, and their unity/compiz is shit and buggy. I installed this shit twice on different computers, and I often had it crash and a mesasge "saying something went wrong, would you like to send a report to canonical ?"
There's too many softwares that comes by default on the system even if you don't want them, you can't choose during the install process
It lacks of customization
They are taking the microsoft path doing bloated stuff like snappy
Instead of doing like every distribution and using wayland (contributing to it, and using it for their stuff) they created their own display server which is stupid. Even the distributions based on ubuntu will not use this shit.

Used to use Debian for all my junk then switched to Ubuntu.

I always use the minimal installation and build to what i need so I have no qualms about using it. Quite like it as their is usually more up to date software and a bit earlier adoption on interesting things.

Then at the end of the day it's not too different from Debian anyhow.

*There fuck

>this guy trying to install flash from the website
wow amazing , he either came from fedora or windows

What's up with cinnamon?

Ubuntu is the lowest friction Linux on most hardware. It has a large community so finding solutions to issues are easier. Hardware support is generally very good as well so if you have an off the shelf laptop or desktop from a big OEM like Dell or Lenovo then shit is most likely gonna work just fine.

Ubuntu gives you a good Linux environment with no more hassle than Windows or OS X so it is win-win.

You have to remember most devs don't want to rice the fuck out of their work system. They want something stable and consistent that allows them to do their work and go home.

is there any difference between ubuntu minimal and debian with no GUI?

Yes.
Different repos. Snappy package manager. Mir display server.

>Linux is a distro
Kill yourself.

Because professionals just want to get shit done and not fight a stupid and broken configuration

Same reason people use other mainstream stuff even though its not always technically the best

Ubuntu may not be perfect but its the best we have by FAR

>tfw developers hate gentoo and freedumbs

Yup Debian doesn't use the huge launchpad repository which is one of the best parts about Ubuntu. I tried to add it to Debian using the trusty lauchpad source to install the latest version of MPV from a maintainer but I got an error.

No, releasing changes in default configuration/packages counts as a new distro

Ubuntu and Mint are separate distros

it lets you just get on with your work instead of fucking around

gentoo isnt free

no spyware on my ubuntu server

It's common among devs but I wouldn't say the most popular. I see a lot of people use Debian, OpenSUSE and a ton of other distros. From my experience sysadmins and dev use Gentoo
>Source based
>"Just werks"
>Great support
>Great community
>Mature

To each their own. It mostly comes down to personal or collective preference.

>Does have it more support for certain software that others don't?
Absolutely. Only arch and gentoo can compare. Arch outdoes ubuntu, gentoo has more niche programs but is sometimes missing a couple of packages available for ubuntu.

The main reason though is simply that it's a unix-like that doesn't require buying a mac and it's advertised as just werking (even though it doesn't).

Post that comparison between arch and ubuntu where nobody could refute that arch was superior nowadays

>From my experience sysadmins and dev use Gentoo
What experience? Shitposts on Sup Forums? Sysadmins use redhat-based and debian-based distros

Those two things are still far from ready pham.

Every sysadmin I know either uses Gentoo or Debian. I've only seen Red Hat a few times and CentOS on servers. You're the one shit posting.

Ubuntu is a debian-based distro.

>Why is Ubuntu the most popular linux distro among professional developers using linux (and it seems like its vanilla unity ubuntu)?
Most probably the easy installation and the availability of software without the ahssle.
>Does have it more support for certain software that others don't?
Much of third party software and proprietary codecs are easily available. So yes.
>Why is there a lot of hate on it here?
Is not only for distro wars, some people do have better performance on more advanced systems like Gentoo or Arch,